Frederik Ramm wrote: > Hi, > > Mario Salvini wrote: >> Even in germany on these roads there are no additional rights-of-way in >> comparison to "normal" cycleways (except that bicycles get the >> officially allowance to drive next to each other and not just inline. >> buts that's piece of cake ;) ). A normal cycleway with >> motorcar/agricultural/...=yes/destination/... would be exactly the same. > > We're getting very much into national detail here but just to give an > example, look at this aerial image (which is 100 metres from my office BTW): > > http://maps.google.de/maps?ll=49.007912,8.378746&spn=0.000729,0.001026&t=h&z=20 > > The road going east-west is a former residential road with different > lanes for each direction of travel, plus diagonal parking spaces in the > middle. It is over 20 metres wide. This road has now been designated a > "Fahrradstrasse" (cycle road). Motorized traffic is still allowed at > "adequate speeds" (whatever that means).
I'm not convinced this is a national detail, as it's one that I brought up given that they're a common fixture in Portland, Oregon; and Victoria and Vancouver, BC. The fact you also have them in Germany strikes me as further evidence that cycleroads are not a national detail, but rather an international development in highway design. > While I am not a big fan of endless tagging discussions, tagging the > road above as "highway=cycleway, car=yes" strikes me as grossly misleading. > > Maybe it should simply retain highway=residential. After all, the > "residentialness" of the road has not changed one bit since it was > designated a cycle road. On the other hand, it's no longer as minor as a residential road, nor has the same use as a residential road (as it's throughbound for cyclists).
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
